Disagree on Ouachita

I agree with Richard Mason that the Ouachita River has the potential to be an even greater asset for south Arkansas. However, I am burdened with facts which require disagreement with the column. His suggestion that the Ouachita be removed from the “list of Arkansas navigable streams” is a nonstarter. Navigability is a fact question; the Ouachita was navigable in 1836, and remains so today. His assertion that the Corps can “set the discharge rate to accommodate the desired flow rate” for stable water levels as a “one day a month job” demonstrates unfamiliarity with the water flow involved and the stakeholders who must be accommodated.

He glorifies the pre-’70s water levels. The water levels he advocates would not accommodate today’s boats, which draw too much water. Pete Wilson, Standard Break, Red Eye and Mud Lake would be inaccessible to today’s boats. The moss was a problem then and would be again.

The moss was controlled by saltwater produced along with oil and released into the river, which killed coontail moss. We had massive fish kills. Jim Pomeroy successfully ran for the Legislature with a program of reducing saltwater pollution of the river. The idea that fish from 65,000 acres will concentrate in the reduced water levels is absurd if the 65,000 acres are obliterated. Less water, less fish. No water, no fish.

Duck hunting was spotty or nonexistent at those levels. It is much better today because of the water levels and can be improved even more if the Fish and Wildlife Service and our Game and Fish Commission cooperatively improve food for wildlife. Other water birds use its shallow waters.

Water is the resource crucial to our population today. The Ouachita can be used as a reliable water source for both recreation and water to meet our human needs. Let us do that with due regard for fact.

EMON A. MAHONY JR.

El Dorado